e.g.Autofocus Comparison - Canon EOS 70D vs Panasonic GH4EunJae Imhttp://vimeo.com/96882002"Yes, I think both are working well. I just try AF Mode (49-Area & Custom Multi) on GH4 and it was bit more faster then 1-Area (center). BTW, AF is almost useless at 4K mode." - EunJae Im

Pany's AF in both GH4/GH3 is 'wobbly', unfit for serious Cine, but fine for regular videographers/handicamers where Cine-centric smooth speed-customizable focus pull matters, as would be the case for EOS Cine C-series users, or even 70D Cine users with smooth 'no wobble' Touch AF or AF racking

I don't think you could really do it with speed settings. Right now remote lens control units use a knob because the operator really has to do a lot of the pulls to coincide with dialogue and actors don't do things at the same speed every time. You might be able to preset focus points and use a remote knob to do the pulls, though.

e.g.Autofocus Comparison - Canon EOS 70D vs Panasonic GH4EunJae Imhttp://vimeo.com/96882002"Yes, I think both are working well. I just try AF Mode (49-Area & Custom Multi) on GH4 and it was bit more faster then 1-Area (center). BTW, AF is almost useless at 4K mode." - EunJae Im

Pany's AF in both GH4/GH3 is 'wobbly', unfit for serious Cine, but fine for regular videographers/handicamers where Cine-centric smooth speed-customizable focus pull matters, as would be the case for EOS Cine C-series users, or even 70D Cine users with smooth 'no wobble' Touch AF or AF racking

Smooth and accurate is great, but continuously varying the speed of the pull is half the craft and you can't do that with autofocus. I don't doubt that it will all happen eventually, but nobody has refined the interface to make it usable enough yet. About as close as it gets are remote lens control systems that allow an operator to pull focus without being in contact with the camera. Most of those are still pretty expensive. The only one I've tried is the C-Motion and it's still about $20,000.

e.g.Autofocus Comparison - Canon EOS 70D vs Panasonic GH4EunJae Imhttp://vimeo.com/96882002"Yes, I think both are working well. I just try AF Mode (49-Area & Custom Multi) on GH4 and it was bit more faster then 1-Area (center). BTW, AF is almost useless at 4K mode." - EunJae Im

Pany's AF in both GH4/GH3 is 'wobbly', unfit for serious Cine, but fine for regular videographers/handicamers where Cine-centric smooth speed-customizable focus pull matters, as would be the case for EOS Cine C-series users, or even 70D Cine users with smooth 'no wobble' Touch AF or AF racking

Cinematographers don't use AF because you don't pull focus for cinema like you do for stills. A single shot will have several points of focus that need to be hit smoothly and at speeds that work with the overall shot. It's not like shooting stills where you just have to select a point of focus and hit that once to get your shot.

No "serious Cine" lenses have autofocus motors. Or aperture clicks. Zeiss Master Primes, for example. Per lens cost is from around $24,000 to over $30,000 each. No autofocus motors. Zeiss make autofocus lenses for still photography, but not for, "Serious Cinema." That isn't going to change anytime soon.

Canon's own line of Cinema lenses are about $5000 each and manual focus only. There's a reason for this. Professionals don't use autofocus.

e.g.Autofocus Comparison - Canon EOS 70D vs Panasonic GH4EunJae Imhttp://vimeo.com/96882002"Yes, I think both are working well. I just try AF Mode (49-Area & Custom Multi) on GH4 and it was bit more faster then 1-Area (center). BTW, AF is almost useless at 4K mode." - EunJae Im

Pany's AF in both GH4/GH3 is 'wobbly', unfit for serious Cine, but fine for regular videographers/handicamers where Cine-centric smooth speed-customizable focus pull matters, as would be the case for EOS Cine C-series users, or even 70D Cine users with smooth 'no wobble' Touch AF or AF racking

The hippest polarizing filters, although admittedly not a subtle effect, are the Cokin Polacolor filters. I love the Cokin red/blue Polacolor. Used right it gives that kind of funky offset printing effect that characterizes so many vintage postcards.

The primes are an excellent cost/quality combo, IMO. The 30mm f/2 was the first one and it's still one of my favorite lenses. The 45mm f/1.8 is extremely nice and very affordable. If your pockets are a little deeper the 85mm f/1.4 is one of the best of its kind, with less fringing than most of the competition and extremely fast focusing. The 60mm f/2.8 Macro is also extremely nice.

RRJackson: Here's something I don't understand at all. Metering on modern cameras can break the frame down into thousands of segments for complex metering calculations...but nobody can seem to make a metering system that prevents highlight clipping. No way at all to reduce the exposure if the highlights are clipping? Really? In 2014 we can't make that happen? The system can analyze 91,000 segments of the frame, but can't tell if one of them is clipping?

Back on my old OM-4T there were spot-metering selections to expose for shadows or expose for highlights, but it was just exposure compensation. It overexposed by 2 stops based on the thing you put the spot meter on or underexposed by 2 2/3 stops for the shadow compensation.

Most of the digital camera metering options seem to work in similar fashion. Canon's "Highlight Protection" doesn't prevent blown highlights. It just seems to involve some exposure compensation.

This really seems like the kind of thing that processing should be able to handle. If one of those 91,000 segments of metering is blown out then you pull that exposure back. I'm not saying it always has to be engaged, but I'd like the option.

Here's something I don't understand at all. Metering on modern cameras can break the frame down into thousands of segments for complex metering calculations...but nobody can seem to make a metering system that prevents highlight clipping. No way at all to reduce the exposure if the highlights are clipping? Really? In 2014 we can't make that happen? The system can analyze 91,000 segments of the frame, but can't tell if one of them is clipping?

Great piece of journalism guys, i think you summarised perfectly what most of us think about this 1 series. To behonoust, if Samsung, Pana, Sony or any other but Canon would have made the 1 series, it would have been gone long time. Its because Nikon is known fo rits outstanding DSLRs that people still migth believe the 1 seires must have something.

They have, but the pricetag is simply way off Immediatly half the price , and the thing might start selling, it will blow all PxS away. and PxS i mean the top end of the PxS at 3-400 usd.

The problem with that analogy is that none of Nikon's competitors make a small interchangeable lens camera as powerful as the 1 series. Nikon should be a lot more proactive about publicizing the insane amount of processing power and throughput of the camera. It's not like anything else you pick up at any price level. Even in Nikon's DSLR line they only have 3-4 cameras with as much processing. It allows the 1 to be a very smart, very nimble camera with an amazing way of performing tasks. It's really kind of a glimpse at how compact cameras will behave several years down the line.

RRJackson: I get the too-expensive part, but the technology is amazing. It's a relatively small-sensor camera (as some have repeatedly mentioned), but it's really compact and has insane processing power. I've stood around in stores shooting with them and been amazed at the ability to shoot several exposures at once and have the camera suggest the best one. The AF is pretty great. The slow-motion video stills (or whatever they call them) are very cool. From the minute you pick up the camera you can tell it's got a ton of horsepower under the hood.

But yeah, it's pricey and the choices in optics are kinda thin, but with the 32mm f/1.2 what more do you need? I mean, it's pricey, but so is the camera. That camera and lens combo is gold, though. And with a 1/16,000 maximum shutter speed? Please. How can people disparage this little camera?

It's kind of hard to assign "value" to something that doesn't have any competition. The Expeed 3A they brought out for the series had higher throughput than the processors in any of Nikon's other cameras until the release of the D4s, D5300 and D3300. And of course the newest V1 has been upgraded to the Expeed 4A.

The amount of processing power on tap makes these cameras capable of much more than other cameras with similarly-sized sensors.

I mean, I get that the expense is an issue, but I also think the average shooter doesn't realize just how powerful they are, either. That's Nikon's fault, certainly. To most people it seems like an X20 without all the retro-cool styling and a much higher price.

I get the too-expensive part, but the technology is amazing. It's a relatively small-sensor camera (as some have repeatedly mentioned), but it's really compact and has insane processing power. I've stood around in stores shooting with them and been amazed at the ability to shoot several exposures at once and have the camera suggest the best one. The AF is pretty great. The slow-motion video stills (or whatever they call them) are very cool. From the minute you pick up the camera you can tell it's got a ton of horsepower under the hood.

But yeah, it's pricey and the choices in optics are kinda thin, but with the 32mm f/1.2 what more do you need? I mean, it's pricey, but so is the camera. That camera and lens combo is gold, though. And with a 1/16,000 maximum shutter speed? Please. How can people disparage this little camera?

The weight is a big deal. My old Olympus OM-2n weighed 18 oz. My D700 weighs 35 oz. This new Nikon weighs 25 oz. So actually closer to the OM-2n than the D700.

The grip doesn't look all that comfortable. I made do without for decades shooting with an OM-2n, but when I go back to those cameras now I miss having a comfortable grip.

The lack of interchangeable focusing screens is puzzling in a camera like this.

The locking controls are nice. Reminds me of my F5.

The price is higher than expected, but still lower than my D700 was when it was released.

Overall it seems like an excellent effort, but hopefully just the start of a move towards smaller, lighter, more practical cameras with the functionality of the film cameras Nikon was so good at building. Maybe bring back the match-needle metering of the FM3A. There's nothing better than the swing of a needle to visually tell you where your exposure is going.

Anyone can lift a 35 oz. camera. It's not about whether or not you can lift it. It's about how little it impacts your ability to do the things you're going to be doing in the course of your day. I used to carry an Ikegami tube camera that weighed about 35 pounds with an outboard 3/4" VTR that weighed at least that much. I can remember shooting with it in a stunting jet where the camera seemed to weigh five times as much in the turns. It was how the job was done, though, and we dealt with it. Shooting with a 12-pound camera years later was nicer, though. The day went better overall.

This is the thing about smaller, lighter cameras. They're easier to take to the places where they most need to be taken. Especially in places where you need both hands to get around and the weight of the pendulum around your neck starts to seem like more of an issue.

The weight is a big deal. My old Olympus OM-2n weighed 18 oz. My D700 weighs 35 oz. This new Nikon weighs 25 oz. So actually closer to the OM-2n than the D700.

The grip doesn't look all that comfortable. I made do without for decades shooting with an OM-2n, but when I go back to those cameras now I miss having a comfortable grip.

The lack of interchangeable focusing screens is puzzling in a camera like this.

The locking controls are nice. Reminds me of my F5.

The price is higher than expected, but still lower than my D700 was when it was released.

Overall it seems like an excellent effort, but hopefully just the start of a move towards smaller, lighter, more practical cameras with the functionality of the film cameras Nikon was so good at building. Maybe bring back the match-needle metering of the FM3A. There's nothing better than the swing of a needle to visually tell you where your exposure is going.